mån 2010-05-24 klockan 00:47 +1200 skrev Amos Jeffries:
I mean the ExtremeCarpFrontend configuration examples.
990rps was simply the limit reached on the testing hardware. There may
be hardware able to go faster already.
Or a reverse proxy with high memory hit ratio on slower hardware.
Wow. Sure thats hits/sec and not hits/minute?
The 'extreme' setups of Squid-2.7 only reached 990req/sec.
I'm running squid3.0 on Dell R300 servers with 4x2.8GHz Intel Xeons and 12GB of
ram. On production servers I'm getting
max 1500hits/s. With 2500hits/s I have seen that some in
Henrik Nordström wrote:
lör 2010-05-22 klockan 15:08 +1200 skrev Amos Jeffries:
Wow. Sure thats hits/sec and not hits/minute?
The 'extreme' setups of Squid-2.7 only reached 990req/sec.
990 isn̈́'t the extreme.. but very high.
I mean the ExtremeCarpFrontend configuration examples.
990rps was
lör 2010-05-22 klockan 15:08 +1200 skrev Amos Jeffries:
Wow. Sure thats hits/sec and not hits/minute?
The 'extreme' setups of Squid-2.7 only reached 990req/sec.
990 isn̈́'t the extreme.. but very high.
Regards
Henrik
Hi, I've run into problems after upgrading 3.0.STABLE19 (installed from
packages) to squid 3.1
I'm running amd64 8.0-RELEASE FreeBSD, with squid as accelerated proxy.
3.0.STABLE19 runs almost flawlessly. I'm getting 'Select loop Error' every
second:
2010/05/21 14:37:34| Select loop Error. Retry
alter...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, I've run into problems after upgrading 3.0.STABLE19 (installed from
packages) to squid 3.1
I'm running amd64 8.0-RELEASE FreeBSD, with squid as accelerated proxy.
3.0.STABLE19 runs almost flawlessly. I'm getting 'Select loop Error' every
second:
2010/05/21
